Waugh, Simpson and McCabe would share fifth bowling duties as there are only four specialist bowlers (but what a quartet!) – the trade-off for having the batting class of SR Waugh at six. One of the things that leaps out about this team is what an extraordinary fielding side it is. I suppose Michael Clarke should probably be at number 5, but I don't like picking teams without Stan McCabe.

Like Australia, only four genuine bowlers with Worrell (who I’ve picked as an opener for balance) and Lloyd having to make up the support options, but it is a superb frontline quartet and despite a long tail, the batting line up is very powerful.

Notes: I picked Garth Le Roux over Vincent van der Bijl because I wanted two genuine quick bowlers, and already had similar bowlers in Philander and Procter. Plus Le Roux bats a bit. Herbie Taylor is in my first XI. Faulkner to provide the spin option. Jock Cameron ahead of Mark Boucher. Anybody know a better bat than Cullinan?

Which would you say is the strongest side. You are welcome to vote as per your own 2nd XIs as well

If we're considering Vince van der Bijl & Garth Le Roux then Jimmy Cook, Henry Fotheringham, Peter Kirsten, Ken McEwan, Clive Rice, Alan Kourie, Stephen Jefferies and the likes can be considered. Basically mentioning the team for the 80's here once some of the first generation of legends were coming to the end of their careers. Obviously some would have played in the 70's if you consider Rice was chosen to tour Australia in 1970 (vd Bijl also).

I'm not sure I would say Procter and Philander are similar in bowling style other than they both can hold a bat and both take wickets. Procter more erratic in search of wickets and bowled in-swing to right-handers. Not sure if that effects your decision making ?

If we're considering Vince van der Bijl & Garth Le Roux then Jimmy Cook, Henry Fotheringham, Peter Kirsten, Ken McEwan, Clive Rice, Alan Kourie, Stephen Jefferies and the likes can be considered. Basically mentioning the team for the 80's here once some of the first generation of legends were coming to the end of their careers. Obviously some would have played in the 70's if you consider Rice was chosen to tour Australia in 1970 (vd Bijl also).

I'm not sure I would say Procter and Philander are similar in bowling style other than they both can hold a bat and both take wickets. Procter more erratic in search of wickets and bowled in-swing to right-handers. Not sure if that effects your decision making ?

All the players in bold above were and are very strong contenders for the 2nd SA XI.

When it comes to Clive Rice, it was between him and Aubrey Faulkner, and I couldn't fit him in, plus I needed a spin option, and I don't Paul Adams + Clive Rice is a poorer combo than Faulkner + Le Roux/van der Bijl. Lindsay and Boucher really give Cameron a tough fight and I would not mind replacing him with either of them. Trevor Goddard could get in ahead of Gary Kirsten maybe, but not in my book.

Fanie de Villiers and Peter Pollock have legitimate claims to be in their, and so, let's say I have Neil Adcock and Mike Procter there for sure. Then pick two out of:

All the players in bold above were and are very strong contenders for the 2nd SA XI.

When it comes to Clive Rice, it was between him and Aubrey Faulkner, and I couldn't fit him in, plus I needed a spin option, and I don't Paul Adams + Clive Rice is a poorer combo than Faulkner + Le Roux/van der Bijl. Lindsay and Boucher really give Cameron a tough fight and I would not mind replacing him with either of them. Trevor Goddard could get in ahead of Gary Kirsten maybe, but not in my book.

Fanie de Villiers and Peter Pollock have legitimate claims to be in their, and so, let's say I have Neil Adcock and Mike Procter there for sure. Then pick two out of:

West Indies probably have the best 2nd XI bowling attack. Aus probably the best batting.

England have a decent combo of both batting and bowling

And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

I didn’t choose Compton because he made the CW First XI and was thus excluded. In my team he would have replaced Ranji, so excluding both of them, that leaves five players different. You’ve already said that you’d take Verity over Underwood, which means that you must consider the other four:

Boycott
Gower
Snow
Willis

…to be far ahead of:

Grace
Pietersen
Richardson
Statham

Needless to say I strongly disagree (obviously, given that I selected the second team!), but it would be great to hear your opinions.

I didn’t choose Compton because he made the CW First XI and was thus excluded. In my team he would have replaced Ranji, so excluding both of them, that leaves five players different. You’ve already said that you’d take Verity over Underwood, which means that you must consider the other four:

Boycott
Gower
Snow
Willis

…to be far ahead of:

Grace
Pietersen
Richardson
Statham

Needless to say I strongly disagree (obviously, given that I selected the second team!), but it would be great to hear your opinions.

Grace V Boycott: In relative terms WG Grace is easily the greatest cricketer of his generation, and probably the second greatest cricketer of all time after Bradman. However, in absolute terms I don't that he can complete with such a superb technician as Boycott. Against a bowler like Garner he would not have the technique to score a significant amount of runs without prior training and practice. Likewise, Boycott would probably struggle on a substandard 1870s pitch, but the assumption made by most 'counter-factual' thinkers is that any hypothetical pitch would be at least be flat and reasonable.

Gower V Pietersen: There is not much between these batsman as both would be attacking and unpredictable, although Gower would play any spin bowler significantly better. He was also one of the best cover fieldsman I've seen.

Richardson V Snow: As with Grace, we have a similar set of unknowns with respect to Richardson's bowling. It is possible that he would be as fast and as intimidating as Snow, but I doubt it. Snow played two magnificent series against Australia, and also against the West Indies in 1967/68. John Snow time and again knocked-over great top order batsman, and is a proven performer. Trueman or Larwood might be England's greatest fast bowlers, but John Snow was simply the best.

Willis v Statham: There is not much between these bowlers as they were both accurate and dependable. However, in his prime Willis had an extra yard of pace that Statham never had. With work-horses like Bedser and Underwood/Verity in the side the skills of Statham are not in great demand. Better to have a couple of strike-bowlers like Snow and Willis to open the attack, and then alternate them with shortish stints.